A Short History of Progress by Ronald Wright
Wright was preaching to the converted, in my case, when he makes the case for getting a grip and living within our means before we exhaust the carrying capacity of mother Earth. I enjoyed reading his book, A Short History of Progress, all the same, despite the scary moments when you want to tear your hair and yell, "No, no, I don't want to be living in the last century of progress!" and then despair because it looks like the only way to prevent it is to get all the greedy guys in control of the goodies to stop panicing about hoarding up even more of their unfair share of the spoils and start thinking about the future, instead.
But I've been depressed about the fact many of the most powerful people on the Earth are certifiable maniacs ever since it was brought to my attention, as a young adult, that world leaders were seriously considering destroying all life on Earth if necessary, just to decide who was right about how life ought to be lived on Earth. Go figure. No child of the cold war can be shocked by the notion that the rich and powerful might have the emotional maturity of juvenile delinquents armed with machine guns in a crowded school yard.
If there was a sour note, for me, in the pleasure of finding a book that gets a vital message out there as effectively as A Short History of Progress, it was hearing through the grapevine that the author, Ronald Wright, is disparaging about Jared Diamond's masterpiece, Guns, Germs, and Steel. I don't find the two of them at all incompatible. Wright stresses the boom and bust inevitabilities of those who consume without reference to sustainability. Diamond answers the question of why some areas of the Earth did better than others in the race for dominance, presuming all human beings had an equal innate potential to win the development sweep stakes.
Perhaps the friction, if there is any (a quick website failed to find anything I could use to deny or confirm the rumor), stems from the familiar if often unfortunate rivalry arising from different disciplinary perspectives. Jared Diamond is a scientist. Wright comes to his conclusions from the humanities and social sciences end of things.
Personally I feel that there is plenty in "Guns, Germs, and Steel" to support and reinforce the idea that it is high time for man to know himself, as Wright concludes in A Short History, as "an Ice Age hunter only half-evolved towards intelligent; clever but seldom wise."
6 Comments:
We need a very special group of individuals who are willing to run for office with the intent of bringing an M.R.I Government to the people. A government that cannot lie. A fair tax system. One where each man and woman decides from a previously voted on list. A list of all the 1000 or so things it takes to run a country. Health Care, Education, Pension, road maintenance. Set a tax program up with the computer banking and interact payments. I think we honestly would see a shrinking poverty level and government. A world that meets a little closer to the center. We might just figure out a way to make life interesting for everyone at the same time. A world where everyone is very happy and proud to be in, and all have that same feeling for any other. Everyone in the world has so much going on differently, it's a wonder how we will ever be able to get on the same page in this literally "choose your own adventure" novel! I would like to hear "You have chosen wisely" However, then I remember something that went like "an Ice Age hunter only half-evolved towards intelligent; clever but seldom wise." I'd be guessing it's about time for some wising up! This blind push by our leaders for technology to give themselves profit, has created the potential for us to bring forth a new system that exposes the liars. To which then the people can follow the leaders who are telling the truth! I'd be willing to run for office. Install the system and then just step aside and let the people take care of their God given right! Themselves. Everybodies individual decisions, now mean something.
Hi Bart. I think I would have to agree with you that Diamond's analysis is more extensive. I also derive more hope from his thesis -- that who wins the "cargo"game is predicated to a considerable extent on facts to do with facts, not ego -- than Wright's call for power to the people. I sometimes fear that people really do not want to know the truth about ourselves, as a species. But being able to see the good and the bad clearly is crucial if we hope to stop repeating history.
The late great Neil Postman - whom the mighty NY Times failed to list in its authors of the year,pleaded with us to go the way of the Athenians and not that of the Visigoths. Have we been doing this? I don't think so because we go on "amusing ourselves to death" and choosing leaders who can't read books like "A Short History..", etc. And wouldn't care if they could. Because in one almighty nation, it is "The Corporation" that rules - as the Canadian film showed, and is driving us insanely toward oblivion. There are signs of sanity in the UN's Kyoto Accord, nuclear non-proliferation treaty, laws against pre-emptive war, World Court rulings on crimes against humanity and so on, but corporate USA will have none of it. Ronald Wright has shown us beautifully where we're headed, unless we do something about it, and that there's not much time to do it.
Lynda,
I stumbled onto your site while looking for additional information on Easter Island. I read Ronald Wright's book with a sinking feeling in my stomach, because I could see we've been spiraling downward for a very long time. In essence, I think we're pretty much doomed, because we, as a species, seem to be incapable of acting collectively to deal with global problems. Ever since I read a book called The Population Bomb decades ago in my freshman year in college, I've been making the hard choices to preserve our natural world. To me, that means not reproducing, growing much of my own food, driving a 12-year-old car only when I have to, living in a small house, eating a vegan diet, recycling and reusing virtually everything, not flying anywhere for any reason, avoiding big-box stores, etc., etc., etc. When I was young, I stupidly assumed that everyone would read The Population Bomb and act on it. I worked to indoctrinate my siblings and others and felt fairly confident that when they "grew up," they too would make the hard choices necessary to preserve our world. Was I ever wrong! In the 35 years since I read that book, the world population has more than doubled. And it's not just the world population I?m talking about here, it's the population of the United States, Europe, and other "civilized" nations that's wreaking havoc on the environment. I recently measured my ecological footprint again, and as frugally as I live in comparison with the average American, I still have a score of 12, which means if everyone on the earth lived like I do, three earths would be required to support all of us in the lifestyle to which I've become accustomed. Who?s responsible? I blame ?civilized? societies, which means I blame all of us, including myself. We can't expect politicians to take over and convince us to follow them in the right direction. That'll never happen. The bottom line is, we're in control, because we're the consumers. If we stop buying processed food and more "stuff" that we really don?t have to have to survive, we win back our independence and our ability to chart our own course--back from the brink, if we're lucky!
Don't give up hope! Hope needs every bit of every one of us who has the courage of their convictions about wanting to make the world one that's sustainable for future generations. What we need is to get organized behind NGOs or other organizations that fight the fight. Thanks for commenting, and for being intelligent enough to see the big picture as something that does matter.
I think that human beings resemble civilizations. They both have beginnings and ends. They both have varying lifespan and they both cannot see past their own existence. The majority of humans cannot change their self-destructive lifestyles because
A) they are not fighting for survival and cannot come to terms with death as something tangible or B) they are fighting to survive and are unable to change due to their financial or geographical status.
I think that like so many scholars before him, Wright will be cast aside and decades or centuries later after our civilization has collapsed and a new one is beginning someone will find his book (possibly digital?) and wonder why no one listened? All too common.
Unless it's your home being flooded by a dam break, your family starving because the earth has turned to salt flats the majority of us won't care. So in this case it is always the majority that ruins it for the majority (not taking into account that there are a few political leaders who shepherd us like cattle into the collective brainwash tank, spoon feeding us big screen TVs and liposuction for those avid TV watchers).
So far it seems as though the goal of North Americans is to turn their lives into one big party. I wonder what the ratio is of people producing food to the people not producing food? If that chain was cut imagine what chaos would occur. Imagine if our farm fields turned to desolate salt flights like those of the late Fertile Crescent.... We would have a lot of human fertilizer on our hands.
This may sound disgusting and depressing and it is but why do we always have to think that it will work out? Think that someone is looking after it? That someone will do something to take care of the situation and you won’t have to do anything. Hope you say. ah hope well hope wont feed, shelter or protect your family from the elements. So buck up folks. Your TV lies so do something about it! Elect responsible governments. Raise knowledgeable children. Lead by example and don't count on anyone but yourself to start the change that you want to see in the world!
Post a Comment
<< Home